ha_get_configRetrieve Home Assistant instance configuration details, including location, time zone, unit system, version, and loaded components, to verify API connectivity.
Instance configuration: location, time zone, unit system, version, loaded components. Best first call to confirm the connection works.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld), so the description isn't obligated to restate them. It adds the useful framing that this doubles as a connectivity probe, but says nothing about response format, latency, or failure modes. With annotations carrying the behavioral load, a 3 is appropriate.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two tight sentences with zero filler. The returned-fields summary is front-loaded and the usage hint follows efficiently. Every clause earns its place.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a zero-arg, read-only tool with annotations covering its safety profile and no output schema to explain, the description provides everything an agent needs: what it returns and why you'd call it first. Nothing material is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool takes no parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond what the empty schema already conveys. This is the baseline-4 case: no parameter documentation is needed.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Names a specific resource (instance configuration) and enumerates the exact fields returned (location, time zone, unit system, version, loaded components), so the agent knows precisely what this tool produces. The verb is only implied ('Get' via the title), and it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings, but the resource is distinct enough to stand apart from the state/history/logbook tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
States a clear use context: 'Best first call to confirm the connection works.' This tells the agent when to reach for it. It stops short of naming alternatives or giving explicit when-not conditions, but for a trivial zero-arg config read that is adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.